|
pauls
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21,
Visits: 0
|
My setup - PaW Classic with audio fed into intercomm. Display on Skydemon. I've staretd a thread running on the PaW forum on the same issue - the amount of audio alerts. Reason I've posted here is that I'd like the solution to be controlled via SD. Maybe a cheeky API integration?
Overall - I think its a BAD idea to mute audio alerts in the circuit - surely that's where you'll find lots of other planes!
However, it would be great to have the following options
1) No (or reduced*) audio alerts when you're "on the ground**". Rationale - if i operate from an ATZ environment i'm happy to have a quick glance at skydemon but audio warnings over OTT during takeoff
2) Reduced* audio alerts when in the circuit. I think its will be impossible to do - how would PaW know you're in the circuit. This is where something in SD would be neat a button called "i'm in the circuit Tim, please be quiet, I need to concentrate" - But my nirvana here- if I've set PaW to alert me on traffic in 10km - that's useful for the cruise. But not so much for a circuit. Like wise if there's traffic 2000ft above me in the circuit, I'm not (immimently) worried about it. "even better if" - if i'm facing downwind i care about traffic on final converging with me. I dont care so much about traffic converging from behind me as that's how circuits work
* reduced range and height from me versus cruise notification
** my speed < 20kts AND AGL<100ft for example
|
|
|
|
|
grahamb
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 576,
Visits: 27K
|
+x+xThank you for the helpful video about what happens when two aircraft crash.
No, we have not (yet) made any changes to the way this works.
It is possible that in the future we would decide an aircraft is on the ground if its groundspeed was nearly zero AND its altitude reported below a certain height AGL, and ignore it for the purposes of collision detection. Those two together would be quite a safe way of "proving" it. If they're very wrong, collision detection isn't going to work anyway. Giving recent experience, I'd vote not to spend too much effort into 'how to delete signals from the collision warning". One of the most prominent issues this virus times is certain pilots not looking out and entering the runway while someone is on short final. It is not very wise to omit the aircraft at the holding point on the ground at zero speed from collision warning for the approaching aircraft ... I have to disagree. The one place I am looking when approaching to land is the runway. I've got past the stage where I shut my eyes and hope when on short final.
|
|
|
|
|
pilot-byom
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 323,
Visits: 388
|
+xThank you for the helpful video about what happens when two aircraft crash.
No, we have not (yet) made any changes to the way this works.
It is possible that in the future we would decide an aircraft is on the ground if its groundspeed was nearly zero AND its altitude reported below a certain height AGL, and ignore it for the purposes of collision detection. Those two together would be quite a safe way of "proving" it. If they're very wrong, collision detection isn't going to work anyway. Giving recent experience, I'd vote not to spend too much effort into 'how to delete signals from the collision warning". One of the most prominent issues this virus times is certain pilots not looking out and entering the runway while someone is on short final. It is not very wise to omit the aircraft at the holding point on the ground at zero speed from collision warning for the approaching aircraft ...
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Dawson
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.1K,
Visits: 9.2K
|
Thank you for the helpful video about what happens when two aircraft crash.
No, we have not (yet) made any changes to the way this works.
It is possible that in the future we would decide an aircraft is on the ground if its groundspeed was nearly zero AND its altitude reported below a certain height AGL, and ignore it for the purposes of collision detection. Those two together would be quite a safe way of "proving" it. If they're very wrong, collision detection isn't going to work anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
TimT
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 88,
Visits: 92
|
+xLooks like all targets reporting ground level are now suppressed? So we have to assume all reported altitudes have to be correct and aircraft sending no altitude or Zero are suppressed in collision warning? SD Team: Is that correct? Let's just face it: The biggest mid-air risk is in the pattern, and at altitues below 1,000 FT AGL. This recent incident is a case in point: Muting traffic alerts in this scenario, in my opinion, would be the wrong thing to do, despite the additional information load they create. It is exactly when there is lots of traffic, when you think you have seem (some) traffic and when it is already very busy that you need to additional awareness afforded by PCAS like PilotAware. That includes traffic that is straight below you. Seeing the Original Post here it appears that individual needs can be very different. But SD, if you add additional filters, please make them optional.
|
|
|
|
|
pilot-byom
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 323,
Visits: 388
|
Looks like all targets reporting ground level are now suppressed? So we have to assume all reported altitudes have to be correct and aircraft sending no altitude or Zero are suppressed in collision warning?
|
|
|
|
|
PaulSS
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 89,
Visits: 3.2K
|
A definite positive to the latest update of Pilot Aware/changing SD with Tim, seems to be no voice alerts about ground stations; which is great news. It would SEEM that ground stations are no longer treated as aircraft and so the warnings are suppressed. It made for a much nicer circuit experience the other day and no need to use my 'suppress all' function :-)
Also, MUCH better seeing ground stations as green/red 'antennas' and not aircraft symbols. Many thanks for implementing such an improvement.
|
|
|
|
|
Peer
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 58,
Visits: 392
|
+xYou know there's a SkyDemon option to temporarily mute aural traffic warnings, right? Just tap the traffic radar then choose Silence All. It's as easy to undo it, too.
I'd rather not filter out all traffic below a certain altitude or height, wouldn't it be better to detect traffic that's on the ground if that's the problem? We could probably employ a check that used both the target's groundspeed and altitude to have a pretty good guess as to whether it was on the ground or not. I would love that option!
|
|
|
|
|
PaulSS
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 89,
Visits: 3.2K
|
You know there's a SkyDemon option to temporarily mute aural traffic warnings, right? Just tap the traffic radar then choose Silence All. It's as easy to undo it, too.
I didn't know that, so thank you for the information. It is something I will certainly use in the future. I have read the manual abut there are lots of great features in SD and I often find myself forgetting some of the less-used (by me) ones.
Now, I know you have been working closely with Pilot Aware on the ground station stuff and maybe this is no longer an issue but I was getting continuous warnings from the airfield ground station and that is clearly not ideal. I have updated my PAW but have not yet flown with it, so maybe this problem has already been addressed by no longer showing ground station as aircraft. If not, then, yes, a zero groundspeed/altitude might be useful.
However, we are evidently all different. Graham wants to see and hear about circuit traffic. I'd just like to see circuit traffic and not hear about them below (for instance) 1500'. Now I know about the radar tapping I shall endeavour to bring it into my circuit-joining 'checks' but if I was ever offered the option of auto-muting below XXX ft (selectable) I would take advantage of it.
|
|
|
|
|
grahamb
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 576,
Visits: 27K
|
+xYou know there's a SkyDemon option to temporarily mute aural traffic warnings, right? Just tap the traffic radar then choose Silence All. It's as easy to undo it, too.
I'd rather not filter out all traffic below a certain altitude or height, wouldn't it be better to detect traffic that's on the ground if that's the problem? We could probably employ a check that used both the target's groundspeed and altitude to have a pretty good guess as to whether it was on the ground or not. On the ground would certainly be my preference, as posted above. I'm aware of the 'silence all' option, but a) I don't like having to fiddle with stuff when on final, and b) on a go-around it's another thing to remember to switch back on, otherwise what's the point of EC if you don't enable it in the most MAC-risky phase of the flight?
|
|
|
|